A new study reveals the unseemly degree to which the government has spent tens of billions of dollars to co-opt scientists into parroting global-warming alarmism. This has resulted in “models” that supposedly show the need to take drastic action to prevent slight warming in the next 50-100 years, yet those same models cannot predict today’s weather based on past data. The politicians are getting the “results” they want, but the end result may be a new power grab by government to control and direct our lives. Transworldnews.com has a report:
The Science and Public Policy Institute announces the publication of Climate Money, a study by Joanne Nova revealing that the federal Government has a near-monopsony on climate science funding. This distorts the science towards self-serving alarmism. …The US Government has spent more than $79 billion of taxpayers’ money since 1989 on policies related to climate change, including science and technology research, administration, propaganda campaigns, foreign aid, and tax breaks. Most of this spending was unnecessary. Despite the billions wasted, audits of the science are left to unpaid volunteers. A dedicated but largely uncoordinated grassroots movement of scientists has sprung up around the globe to test the integrity of “global warming” theory and to compete with a lavishly-funded, highly-organized climate monopsony. Major errors have been exposed again and again. …Meanwhile, in a distracting sideshow, Exxon-Mobil Corp is repeatedly attacked for paying just $23 million to skeptics—less than a thousandth of what the US government spends on alarmists… The large expenditure designed to prove the non-existent connection between carbon and climate has created a powerful alliance of self-serving vested interests. …Robert Ferguson, SPPI’s president, says: “This study counts the cost of years of wasted Federal spending on the ‘global warming’ non-problem. Government bodies, big businesses and environmental NGOs have behaved like big tobacco: recruiting, controlling and rewarding their own “group-think” scientists who bend climate modeling to justify the State’s near-maniacal quest for power, control, wealth and forced population reduction. “Joanne Nova, who wrote our study, speaks for thousands of scientists in questioning whether a clique of taxpayer-funded climate modelers are getting the data right, or just getting the “right” data. Are politicians paying out billions of our dollars for evidence-driven policy-making, or policy-driven evidence-making? The truth is more crucial than ever, because American lives, property and constitutional liberties are at risk.”
[…] I’m a great fan of nature, but our friends on the left seem a bit extreme. […]
[…] I’m a great fan of nature, but our friends on the left seem a bit extreme. […]
[…] P.S. I’m a great fan of nature, but our friends on the left seem a bit extreme. […]
[…] P.S. I’m a great fan of nature, but our friends on the left seem a bit extreme. […]
The clue is in the first paragraph. Climate and weather are not the same thing and climate models do not predict weather.
What a great phrase!
“evidence-driven policy-making, or policy-driven evidence-making?”
Reminds me of that great Canadian quote about forced measurement of gas by gas stations in liters:
“Our freedom to measure is a measure of our freedom.”
[…] what you’d expect from the crowd that routinely trumpets misleading data on everything from global warming to job […]
[…] But I’m still skeptical about happiness studies. Seems like they might suffer from the credibility issues associated with global warming research. […]
[…] haven’t written much on the global-warming debate, other than to warn about how agenda-driven government funding is corrupting scientific inquiry and to mock nutjob extremists who assert climate change will cause catastrophes ranging from […]